↓ Skip to main content

Wild tomato endosperm transcriptomes reveal common roles of genomic imprinting in both nuclear and cellular endosperm

Overview of attention for article published in Plant Journal, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Wild tomato endosperm transcriptomes reveal common roles of genomic imprinting in both nuclear and cellular endosperm
Published in
Plant Journal, July 2018
DOI 10.1111/tpj.14012
Pubmed ID
Authors

Morgane Roth, Ana M. Florez‐Rueda, Margot Paris, Thomas Städler

Abstract

Genomic imprinting is a conspicuous feature of the endosperm, a triploid tissue nurturing the embryo and synchronizing angiosperm seed development. An unknown subset of imprinted genes (IGs) is critical for successful seed development and should have highly conserved functions. Recent genome-wide studies have found limited conservation of IGs among distantly related species, but there is a paucity of data from closely related lineages. Moreover, most studies focused on model plants with nuclear endosperm development, and comparisons with properties of IGs in cellular-type endosperm development are lacking. Using laser-assisted microdissection, we characterized parent-specific expression in the cellular endosperm of three wild tomato lineages (Solanum section Lycopersicon). We identified 1,025 candidate IGs and 167 with putative homologs previously identified as imprinted in distantly related taxa with nuclear-type endosperm. Forty-two maternally expressed genes (MEGs) and 17 paternally expressed genes (PEGs) exhibited conserved imprinting status across all three lineages, but differences in power to assess imprinted expression imply that the actual degree of conservation might be higher than that directly estimated (20.7% for PEGs and 10.4% for MEGs). Regardless, the level of shared imprinting status was higher for PEGs than for MEGs, indicating dissimilar evolutionary trajectories. Expression-level data suggest distinct epigenetic modulation of MEGs and PEGs, and gene ontology analyses revealed MEGs and PEGs to be enriched for different functions. Importantly, our data provide evidence that MEGs and PEGs interact in modulating both gene expression and the endosperm cell cycle, and uncovered conserved cellular functions of IGs uniting taxa with cellular- and nuclear-type endosperm. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 24%
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 9 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 52%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Unknown 9 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 August 2018.
All research outputs
#7,305,383
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Plant Journal
#2,970
of 7,300 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,659
of 341,164 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Journal
#52
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,300 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,164 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.